Content Count

Joined

Last visited

Community Reputation

About Farhad

Hi Everyone,
I can run MT3D on my model. However, once I want to use RT3D it gives me this error:
Error: Invalid Flow-Transport Link File
Name of the Flow Term Required=THKSAT
How can I fix this problem?

I am using LGR for part of my model. The problem is that once I run MODFLOW on the parent independently it converges. However, once I run MODFLOW on the coupled parent and child mode it does not converge. I played a bit with the solver options but I didn't succeed. Any suggestion?

Do you know a good reference about the concept of array-based parameters with clusters and instances, multipliers, and "Tied" feature in the parameter Dialogue? How can we use GMS to create clusters? I couldn't find any tutorial on this. I have read the GMS manual and the wiki but still, need more information to be able to use this approach of calibration.
Thanks

I have a question about the speed of PCG and PCGN calculations. I am using an x64 bit computer having 16 cores. In my case, if I run a PEST calculation using PCGN solver then it takes about 100% of the CPU. If I run the same model using PCG solver it only takes about 5% of the CPU. However, the time it takes for PEST to complete the first 5 iterations using PCG is less than once it uses PCGN. I was expecting PCGN to be faster than PCG. Am I missing something here?

You have another BC other than three no-flow? If so, that may be an issue. If you have more than one layer you may play with the layer thicknesses. But I guess the starting head is the issue in your model.

It seems your model overestimates at all obs. points. You may think about the inflow and outflow of your system and add more complexity to your model, such as surface recharge/discharge. The transient state might also be an issue, as Sean mentioned. Finally, John Doherty suggests to have more pilot points close to the BCs than the middle of the system. It might control the total inflow/outflow.

I have a question about the speed of PCG and PCGN calculations. I am using an x64 bit computer having 16 cores. In my case, if I run a PEST calculation using PCGN solver then it takes about 100% of the CPU. If I run the same model using PCG solver it only takes about 5% of the CPU. However, the time it takes for PEST to complete the first 5 iterations using PCG is less than once it uses PCGN. I was expecting PCGN to be faster than PCG. Am I missing something here?